Reloading a changed a wordpad document ?

Post by R.Wieser
Hello all,
I've got a program which generates a wordpad document, which I than open by
double-clicking it.
The problem is that when the document is open and I re-generate the document
and double-click it I still see the old contents. To see the new contents I
have to close the old, still-open document first.
Is there a way to override this behaviour using a command-line argument ?
Even just having two document windows open would be an improvement.
remark: I prefer /not/ to use taskkill.

Does it have to be WordPad? Notepad++, by default, throws up a small info box to
let you know that the underlying document has been changed, and would you like
to reload it to see the changes (Yes/No). I don't know how to do that in
WordPad.

R.Wieser

2024-03-25 12:25:28 UTC

Char,

Does it have to be WordPad? Notepad++, by default, [snip]

I could do that, but that means that *all* the documents with that
particular extension will be opened by it. And thats not what I'm looking
for.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Paul

2024-03-25 14:59:20 UTC

Do you have the source code for this program ?

It might be possible to fix the situation with some source editing.

outputfilename-Mar25-2024-1058AM.doc
\------------/ \---------------/

Etcetera.

Paul

R.Wieser

2024-03-25 16:48:25 UTC

Paul,

Post by Paul
It might be possible to fix the situation with some source editing.
outputfilename-Mar25-2024-1058AM.doc
\------------/ \---------------/

I was also considering something in that direction, but that would leave me
with ever more files I would need to clean up.

The thing is that I've already gone over a few options, but wanted to check
if there perhaps is an easy, clean and build-in option already available.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Paul

2024-03-26 00:43:18 UTC

Post by R.Wieser
Paul,

Post by Paul
It might be possible to fix the situation with some source editing.
outputfilename-Mar25-2024-1058AM.doc
\------------/ \---------------/

I was also considering something in that direction, but that would leave me
with ever more files I would need to clean up.
The thing is that I've already gone over a few options, but wanted to check
if there perhaps is an easy, clean and build-in option already available.
Regards,
Rudy Wieser

When sorted in order in File Explorer, the loser ones should
be easy to delete.

Paul

R.Wieser

2024-03-26 07:45:10 UTC

Paul,

Post by Paul
When sorted in order in File Explorer, the loser ones should
be easy to delete.

True.

But I tend to try to do without that kind of work-arounds - though I will
ofcourse look at them if nothing better is available (which I'm currently
trying to figure out).

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

VanguardLH

2024-03-25 20:22:21 UTC

Post by R.Wieser
I've got a program which generates a wordpad document, which I than
open by double-clicking it.

No such thing as a Wordpad filetype. Do you mean an RTF (Rich Text
Format) file, so you can have formatting since text doesn't? Is there
any formatting in the file (i.e., is it just a text file you could open
in Notepad)?

Other programs can open an RTF file, like Word, LibreOffice, and even
Wordpad. RTF is not solely a "Wordpad document".

Post by R.Wieser
The problem is that when the document is open and I re-generate the
document and double-click it I still see the old contents. To see
the new contents I have to close the old, still-open document first.

You can't get your "program" to timestamp its output file, like
file_yymmddhhss (year, month, day, hour, seconds)? Then Wordpad would
have a different target to load instead of failing to open a locked
file. You have a file handle with write state since you already have it
opened for write in Wordpad. Wordpad is an editor, not a viewer.

The "program" should not be stepping atop an existing file (that it
created before) without a prompt asking for you to grant it to
overwrite. At the prompt, if properly coded, the program should allow
you to specify a different filename. What happens when the program
attempts to write to the same file, but it is locked (another process
has write access on the file, like an editor)? A write-locked file for
one process can still be read by another process, but other-process
writes should be blocked to prevent yanking away a document on which you
are currently working.

Post by R.Wieser
Question: Is there a way to override this behaviour using a
command-line argument ? Even just having two document windows open
would be an improvement.

The only command-line argument I've heard of for wordpad.exe,
notepad.exe, and write.exe (other than a filespec) is /p which is
somehow used for printing.

Newyana2

2024-03-26 12:46:16 UTC

"R.Wieser" <***@is.invalid> wrote

| I've got a program which generates a wordpad document, which I than open
by
| double-clicking it.
|
| The problem is that when the document is open and I re-generate the
document
| and double-click it I still see the old contents. To see the new contents
I
| have to close the old, still-open document first.
|
| Question:
| Is there a way to override this behaviour using a command-line argument ?
| Even just having two document windows open would be an improvement.
|
| remark: I prefer /not/ to use taskkill.
|

It's more practical with these issues if you explain what
you're trying to accomplish. Then people can brainstorm
the whole process. It also helps to weed out preconceptions,
like the man who's trying to figure out how to avoid getting
his newspaper wet, wtihout explaining that the problem is
a spraying kitchen faucet and not rain.

R.Wieser

2024-03-26 14:35:47 UTC

Newyana2,

Post by Newyana2
It's more practical with these issues if you explain what
you're trying to accomplish.

I thought I did that in the "the problem is" paragraph. Did I forget to
mention something ? If so, what ?

I even summed it up in the "question:" paragraph.

Post by Newyana2
Then people can brainstorm the whole process.

No thanks. I already did that.

Post by Newyana2
It also helps to weed out preconceptions,

It also attracts a number of people who have no problem replacing my
question with what they decide I /really/ wanted to know - and than waste
their and my time with solving problems I never had (and get all pissed-off
when I mention it).

But, if you think you know I have a preconception somewhere in there than I
would like to hear it.

Post by Newyana2
like the man who's trying to figure out how to avoid getting
his newspaper wet, wtihout explaining that the problem is
a spraying kitchen faucet and not rain.

:-) I've had it way to many times the other way around. Including people
questioning my decision to have a newspaper with me to begin with, and than
going off on tangents to what they think the best replacement for it is or
even how stone tablets where way superior. :-(

To re-phrase my initial post :

I've noticed that WorPad refuses to open a document (with new content) when
it already has that document open (but is showing the old, now gone(!)
content).

Is there a commandline switch to override that behaviour and either open the
document in a new window, or (preferrably) re-load the document.

Thats all I need to know. If that doesn't exist I'm going to work my way
thru a few alternatives myself first.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

J. P. Gilliver

2024-03-26 17:35:39 UTC

In message <utumha$1s51g$***@dont-email.me> at Tue, 26 Mar 2024 15:35:47,
R.Wieser <***@is.invalid> writes
[]

Post by R.Wieser
It also attracts a number of people who have no problem replacing my
question with what they decide I /really/ wanted to know - and than waste
their and my time with solving problems I never had (and get all pissed-off
when I mention it).

Yes, I've noticed that! (The ones who suggested you get the generating
prog. to create time-stamped versions haven't grasped what you want to
do/happen.)
[]

Post by R.Wieser
I've noticed that WorPad refuses to open a document (with new content) when
it already has that document open (but is showing the old, now gone(!)
content).
Is there a commandline switch to override that behaviour and either open the
document in a new window, or (preferrably) re-load the document.

[]
I suspect there isn't, for two reasons:
1. (As some have pointed out) WordPad is an editor, not just a viewer
(i. e. has the ability to write); this may be the root of some of the
problems. (The fact that the generating prog. _can_ create a new version
while WordPad has it open is slightly surprising.)
2. WordPad would have to _know_ that a new version has been created, and
load it automatically. Or are you saying that you'd be willing top open
it manually, when you know the other software has created a new version
of the file, but you'd rather not have to close it first?

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"The wish of the lazy to allow unsupervised access [to the internet] to their
children should not reduce all adults browsing to the level of suitability for a
five-year-old." Yaman Akdeniz, quoted in Inter//face (The Times, 1999-2-10): p12

Char Jackson

2024-03-26 19:34:36 UTC

Post by J. P. Gilliver
[]

Yes, I've noticed that! (The ones who suggested you get the generating
prog. to create time-stamped versions haven't grasped what you want to
do/happen.)

I don't think that's fair at all.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
[]

[]
1. (As some have pointed out) WordPad is an editor, not just a viewer

Other editors can do it, (I mentioned one), so being an editor isn't an
impediment. It's much more likely that the creators of WordPad simply didn't add
the necessary code to support the desired function.

One possible workaround would be to write a wrapper for WordPad, but you'd
quickly get to a point where taskkill would likely enter the picture, and that's
a showstopper.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
(i. e. has the ability to write); this may be the root of some of the
problems. (The fact that the generating prog. _can_ create a new version
while WordPad has it open is slightly surprising.)
2. WordPad would have to _know_ that a new version has been created, and
load it automatically.

'Automatically' would probably be undesirable in the general case. In this
specific case, I'm not sure.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Or are you saying that you'd be willing top open
it manually, when you know the other software has created a new version
of the file, but you'd rather not have to close it first?

R.Wieser

2024-03-26 20:19:59 UTC

J. P. ,

Post by R.Wieser
It also attracts a number of people who have no problem replacing
my question with what they decide I /really/ wanted to know

...

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Yes, I've noticed that! (The ones who suggested you get the generating
prog. to create time-stamped versions haven't grasped what you want to
do/happen.)

No, I've really gotten people who told me in my face that what I asked was
not what I wanted to know, and my /actual/ question was {blah, blah, blah}.

Paul, just like Char, didn't know the answer to my question (quite possible
there isn't one), skipped it and sought a possible other approach. Which
works for most situations/askers.

Newyana2 is leaning towards trying to find a meta question (dragnetting).
Which, to me, isn't there.

(and yes, I know that I'm stepping onto some toes there. Sorry about that.)

Post by R.Wieser
Is there a commandline switch to override that behaviour and either open the
document in a new window, or (preferrably) re-load the document.

[]

Do you know that you're the first one who actually adresses my question ?
:-)

Post by J. P. Gilliver
1. (As some have pointed out) WordPad is an editor, not just a viewer (i.
e. has the ability to write); this may be the root of some of the
problems.

problems like ... what ?

And do notice that its current behaviour has its own problem : If the
document has been recreated it is (very) easy to overwrite it with the old
contents still present in wordpad.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
(The fact that the generating prog. _can_ create a new version while
WordPad has it open is slightly surprising.)

No, not really. If wordpad can load the whole document than there is no
reason to keep the file open - other than create a write (and read?) lock.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
2. WordPad would have to _know_ that a new version has been created, and
load it automatically.

No, that (automatically) is not what I asked (having a document change under
your fingers while you're typing in it ? Yuck!). It only should happen
when tell it to do so.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Or are you saying that you'd be willing top open it manually, when you
know the other software has created a new version of the file, but you'd
rather not have to close it first?

Done manually or thru launching the document should not make a difference.
But my question was about me double-clicking the newly-generated document,
so lets keep it at that.

You know, having to close the old document first before being allowed to
open the (same named) new one would not even be that much of a problem to
me. What is is that currently wordpad brings the old document to top when I
double-click the new document - and doesn't tell a soul about it not being
the new document. :-(

And thats just *begging* me to continue using the old while thinking its the
new data - with the non-zero chance that I overwrite the new data with the
(edited) old data.

IOW, I'm effectivily trying to fix an UI problem.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

J. P. Gilliver

2024-03-26 21:01:31 UTC

Post by R.Wieser
J. P. ,

(John)
[]

Post by R.Wieser
Is there a commandline switch to override that behaviour and either open the
document in a new window, or (preferrably) re-load the document.

[]

Do you know that you're the first one who actually adresses my question ?
:-)

I think I'm quite good at that (certainly at seeing when people are
answering not quite the question that was asked, which doesn't make me
popular).

Post by J. P. Gilliver
1. (As some have pointed out) WordPad is an editor, not just a viewer (i.
e. has the ability to write); this may be the root of some of the
problems.

problems like ... what ?

Well, I'd have thought - since it is _capable_ of writing, that it might
"lock" the file, preventing anything else writing to it. But obviously
that's _not_ happening.

Post by R.Wieser
And do notice that its current behaviour has its own problem : If the
document has been recreated it is (very) easy to overwrite it with the old
contents still present in wordpad.

Yes. Ideally, you want a true viewer - read-only - for the type of file
in question (.rtf?).

I don't suppose the prog. that's creating the file has its own viewer
for them, that you until now haven't been aware of? (What _is_ that
prog.?)

Post by J. P. Gilliver
(The fact that the generating prog. _can_ create a new version while
WordPad has it open is slightly surprising.)

No, not really. If wordpad can load the whole document than there is no
reason to keep the file open - other than create a write (and read?) lock.

Yes, obviously takes its own local copy at the moment of opening.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
2. WordPad would have to _know_ that a new version has been created, and
load it automatically.

No, that (automatically) is not what I asked (having a document change under
your fingers while you're typing in it ? Yuck!). It only should happen
when tell it to do so.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Or are you saying that you'd be willing top open it manually, when you
know the other software has created a new version of the file, but you'd
rather not have to close it first?

Done manually or thru launching the document should not make a difference.
But my question was about me double-clicking the newly-generated document,
so lets keep it at that.

OK, so _you_ instigate the opening (in this case by double-clicking).

It won't help with the problem, but I'm just curious: what is the reason
you're looking at this document? Obviously to see what's changed, but
how big is the document - about a (WordPad) windowful? What sort of
change does the generating prog. usually make?

Post by R.Wieser
You know, having to close the old document first before being allowed to
open the (same named) new one would not even be that much of a problem to
me. What is is that currently wordpad brings the old document to top when I
double-click the new document - and doesn't tell a soul about it not being
the new document. :-(

Yes, I can see that being infuriating!

Post by R.Wieser
And thats just *begging* me to continue using the old while thinking its the
new data - with the non-zero chance that I overwrite the new data with the
(edited) old data.

Definitely a read-only viewer needed - ideally, one without the
behaviour of WordPad! (Or do you _want_ to actually _edit_ the file?)

I'm pretty sure there _are_ other .rtf editors (not sure about viewers)
around, but I don't know if they all have the same (won't open new copy)
behaviour of WordPad.

Post by R.Wieser
IOW, I'm effectivily trying to fix an UI problem.

Not sure it's _quite_ UI.
[]

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Can you open your mind without it falling out?

R.Wieser

2024-03-27 08:52:46 UTC

J. P. ,

Post by R.Wieser
Do you know that you're the first one who actually adresses my question ?
:-)

I think I'm quite good at that (certainly at seeing when people are
answering not quite the question that was asked, which doesn't make me
popular).

I think I make myself unpopulair by putting effort into isolating the
problem first and than formulating an exact question to it. IOW, I'm not
giving the people who respond a lot of leeway in their answers ...

And me being able to point out the downsides of offered work-arounds does
not help either...

Post by R.Wieser
problems like ... what ?

Well, I'd have thought - since it is _capable_ of writing, that it might
"lock" the file, preventing anything else writing to it. But obviously
that's _not_ happening.

:-) I /think/ I might have noticed the document-generating program throwing
an error because it could not open the write-locked file.

Than again, its hard to know how knowledgable the asker is, and he /could/
just be a PEBKAC or ID:10T, not knowing the front from its desktops back.
:-|

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Yes. Ideally, you want a true viewer - read-only - for the type of file in
question (.rtf?).

Nope. I have zero problems with using a full-fledged editor. They come
with a few pro's that could be usefull*, even in this case.

* like editing/annotating and copy-pasting a few paragraphs elsewhere.

If I would wanted to have a read-only "viewer" than my question would have
been exactly that. Likely asking if wordpad has a commandline switch for
it.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
I don't suppose the prog. that's creating the file has its own viewer for
them, that you until now haven't been aware of?

Nope, it doesn't have its own one. Why should it? Its output is just a
document that can be read by pretty-much every editor there is. Its like
asking if the DIR command has its own viewer. :-)

Post by J. P. Gilliver
(What _is_ that prog.?)

You know curiosity killed the kat, right ? :-)

Its not a commonly known program, which is why me mentioning it/its purpose
would not help you in the slightest. It takes information, formats it and
than writes it into the document I mentioned. If you want you can compare
it to "DIR > {some file}".

And yes, that (DIR > file) could be another situation in which I could run
into wordpads ignoring of the new files contents ...

Copying the document from somewhere else (like a thumbdrive) would be
another.

Or, in other words: The answer to the question I asked would be applicable
to more situations than the one I described.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
OK, so _you_ instigate the opening (in this case by double-clicking).

Yes. And I said so in my initial post.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
It won't help with the problem, but I'm just curious: what is the reason
you're looking at this document?

Would you believe me if I said it was to pass the time ? No ? Than I won't
say it. :-)

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Obviously to see what's changed, but how big is the document - about a
(WordPad) windowful?

That depends on the source. But normally its tens of screens full.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
What sort of change does the generating prog. usually make?

That also depends on the source. Often the changes are minor, but sometimes
they are major.

Post by R.Wieser
And thats just *begging* me to continue using the old while thinking its
the new data - with the non-zero chance that I overwrite the new data with
the (edited) old data.

Definitely a read-only viewer needed -

Not if wordpad itself has the solution for what I described build-in - and
I'm still in the discovery phase in that regard.

If it doesn't than I will switch my focus to finding either work-arounds or
perhaps such a reader.

Though in that case I might just take a riched20 component, wrap it in a
dialog and be done with it. Yep, I'm a (hobby) programmer. :-)

Post by J. P. Gilliver
ideally, one without the behaviour of WordPad!

Why ? Thats throwing the baby away with the bathwater ...

Post by J. P. Gilliver
(Or do you _want_ to actually _edit_ the file?)

Normally, no. But at times I have had the need for it.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
I'm pretty sure there _are_ other .rtf editors (not sure about viewers)
around, but I don't know if they all have the same (won't open new copy)
behaviour of WordPad.

As earlier mentioned, I will start to consider other options* /after/ I have
concluded my current question. Yes, I'm odd like that. Sorry. :-)

* even though I already went thru inventorizing a few work-arounds/hacks
before posting my question, taskkill being one of them.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

J. P. Gilliver

2024-03-27 10:53:28 UTC

Post by R.Wieser
J. P. ,

Post by R.Wieser
Do you know that you're the first one who actually adresses my question ?
:-)

I think I'm quite good at that (certainly at seeing when people are
answering not quite the question that was asked, which doesn't make me
popular).

I think I make myself unpopulair by putting effort into isolating the
problem first and than formulating an exact question to it. IOW, I'm not
giving the people who respond a lot of leeway in their answers ...
And me being able to point out the downsides of offered work-arounds does
not help either...

We're kindred spirits (-:
[]

Post by R.Wieser
just be a PEBKAC or ID:10T, not knowing the front from its desktops back.
:-|

I knew PEBKAC, but took me a while to figure out the second one!
[]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
I don't suppose the prog. that's creating the file has its own viewer for
them, that you until now haven't been aware of?

Nope, it doesn't have its own one. Why should it? Its output is just a
document that can be read by pretty-much every editor there is. Its like
asking if the DIR command has its own viewer. :-)

Well, that's related to my asking below what was your _reason_ for
wanting to monitor the changes. More below.
[]

Post by R.Wieser
Or, in other words: The answer to the question I asked would be applicable
to more situations than the one I described.

I can see that. However, I was addressing (though without providing a
solution!) the specific.
[]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
It won't help with the problem, but I'm just curious: what is the reason
you're looking at this document?

Would you believe me if I said it was to pass the time ? No ? Than I won't
say it. :-)

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Obviously to see what's changed, but how big is the document - about a
(WordPad) windowful?

That depends on the source. But normally its tens of screens full.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
What sort of change does the generating prog. usually make?

That also depends on the source. Often the changes are minor, but sometimes
they are major.

These questions were trying to find what your _specific_ problem is. I
appreciate you asked in more _general_ terms (basically "does WordPad
have a switch that allows it to re-open the same document it already has
open [if someone/something else has changed it]"), but I was trying to
find _why_ you wanted that: fair enough, it's good to ask the general
question (from the lack of responses that actually give the switch, the
answer would appear to be "no, it has no such switch"). I had the
feeling you wanted something like a "status window", so you could see
what was changing in real time, or at least in response to actions you
or the originating prog. take (hence my asking if the originating prog.
had a viewer). Since you're somewhat secretive about what the
originating prog. is (or does), I was unable to abandon the suspicion
that that's what you wanted! If it isn't, what _do_ you want - for/with
the output of this specific prog., not as a general WordPad question
(for which it doesn't seem an answer is forthcoming)?
[]

Post by R.Wieser
Though in that case I might just take a riched20 component, wrap it in a
dialog and be done with it. Yep, I'm a (hobby) programmer. :-)

[I was once, but not kept up to date (even though that's now decades!)
with how a lot of modern things work.]
[]

Post by R.Wieser
As earlier mentioned, I will start to consider other options* /after/ I have
concluded my current question. Yes, I'm odd like that. Sorry. :-)
* even though I already went thru inventorizing a few work-arounds/hacks
before posting my question, taskkill being one of them.
Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Yes, presumably a batch file of the form
kill existing WordPad
re-open WordPad with <file>
. I share your reluctance to use kill - it's admitting defeat, as well
as you don't know what might not be tidied-up properly - and there's the
matter of identifying which task is WordPad. (Though the re-open line
may be able to assign a specific task number, or log it somewhere.)

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I'd rather trust the guys in the lab coats who aren't demanding that I get up
early on Sundays to apologize for being human.
-- Captain Splendid (quoted by "The Real Bev" in mozilla.general, 2014-11-16)

R.Wieser

2024-03-27 12:54:31 UTC

J, P. ,

Post by R.Wieser
just be a PEBKAC or ID:10T, not knowing the front from its desktops
back. :-|

I knew PEBKAC, but took me a while to figure out the second one!

I was a bit sneaky there, inserting that ":". I didn't want it to be /too/
obvious. :-)

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Well, that's related to my asking below what was your _reason_
for wanting to monitor the changes.

Again, I do *NOT* want to /monitor/ any changes.

I just want to see the contents of the document I just double-clicked.
Thats all. I asked for it, it needs to happen.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
These questions were trying to find what your _specific_ problem is.

In a few words :? Explicitily asking for something to happen and
(silently!) being ignored (which has caused me problems in the past).

Post by J. P. Gilliver
from the lack of responses that actually give the switch, the answer
would appear to be "no, it has no such switch"

I would already be glad with "I'm not aware of the existance of such a
switch" kind of replies - and than possibly /followed/ with suggestions of
other approaches.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
I had the feeling you wanted something like a "status window",

...

Post by J. P. Gilliver
If it isn't, what _do_ you want

Simple: double-click a file, the file gets loaded and displayed. Rinse and
repeat.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
for/with the output of this specific prog.

I see I made a mistake in mentioning the program which is the source of the
document. It allowed you to side-track yourself.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
not as a general WordPad question (for which it doesn't seem an
answer is forthcoming)?

As far as I'm concerned the answer must still be sought in direct connection
to wordpad - as it is causing the problem, nothing else.

Pehaps I will use "taskkill" (or similar mechanisms) for a while and see how
I like it. Might even put something like it in a launcher program.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

J. P. Gilliver

2024-03-27 20:28:16 UTC

In message <uu14vm$2rm87$***@dont-email.me> at Wed, 27 Mar 2024 13:54:31,
R.Wieser <***@is.invalid> writes
[]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Well, that's related to my asking below what was your _reason_
for wanting to monitor the changes.

Again, I do *NOT* want to /monitor/ any changes.

You do, sort of.

Post by R.Wieser
I just want to see the contents of the document I just double-clicked.
Thats all. I asked for it, it needs to happen.

WordPad won't re-open a file it already has open. This is arguably a
bug, but that's the way it is. I won't say "get over it", because I get
very cross when people say that sort of thing to _me_; instead, I am
trying to understand _why_ you want to do this. Railing "because it
should" will only frustrate you; there are lots of things in the world I
wish would work differently (or even "properly" in many cases), but they
don't, and I eventually accept them - however much I hate the fact(s).
We're not going to get WordPad changed ("fixed" if you like) -
especially the version that (from where you're posting) came with XP or
7.

You "just" want to see the contents of the document you just
double-clicked. But, in practice, you want to see the _changes_.
Otherwise you wouldn't have raised this question!

Unless your original reason for wanting to see the (changed) document
has long gone, and you're just pursuing this for its own sake. In which
case feel free - I have done the same all too often in the past!

Post by J. P. Gilliver
These questions were trying to find what your _specific_ problem is.

In a few words :? Explicitily asking for something to happen and
(silently!) being ignored (which has caused me problems in the past).

And being misunderstood by some.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
from the lack of responses that actually give the switch, the answer
would appear to be "no, it has no such switch"

I would already be glad with "I'm not aware of the existance of such a
switch" kind of replies - and than possibly /followed/ with suggestions of
other approaches.

"I'm not aware of the existence [!] of such a switch".

Post by J. P. Gilliver
I had the feeling you wanted something like a "status window",

...

Post by J. P. Gilliver
If it isn't, what _do_ you want

Simple: double-click a file, the file gets loaded and displayed. Rinse and
repeat.

Not gonna happen - with NotePad at least. It should, _perhaps_; it's not
gonna. But you've homed in on that being what you want.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
for/with the output of this specific prog.

I see I made a mistake in mentioning the program which is the source of the
document. It allowed you to side-track yourself.

It allowed me to ask "why do you want to do this" - as in "what is the
_reason_ you want to see these changes", rather than just "WordPad
doesn't behave the way I want [and arguably how it should] - anyone know
a way to fix it".

I don't really believe you decided, out of the blue, to see if WordPad
behaved in a certain way: you were actually wanting to do something, and
tried using WordPad, and it didn't. You _then_ asked why (or, more
specifically, does anyone know a switch to make it).

Post by J. P. Gilliver
not as a general WordPad question (for which it doesn't seem an
answer is forthcoming)?

As far as I'm concerned the answer must still be sought in direct connection
to wordpad - as it is causing the problem, nothing else.

It's causing the problem - in that it's not behaving the way you want
(and that arguably it should). But rather than the problem with WordPad,
which you have identified, I and some others were trying to help you do
what you were originally trying to do (and other others misunderstood
what you were trying to do).

If what you were originally trying to do - even if you now won't admit
it!, which was see a changed document - is no longer of interest, but
you want instead to pursue the WordPad bug ad infinitum (ad nauseam),
fair enough, but tell us.

(You wanted to do something, and you used a tool you thought should; the
tool didn't work as you expected. You asked if it was possible to make
the tool work as you expected, which was a good move, because if someone
knew the answer, it's more generally useful, and lets all of us learn
how to use that tool in that way, it's more generally useful. However,
especially if nobody knows how to do that - it may even not be possible
- then helping you do what you were originally trying to do is better
than nothing.)

Post by R.Wieser
Pehaps I will use "taskkill" (or similar mechanisms) for a while and see how
I like it. Might even put something like it in a launcher program.
Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Yes.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Time is an illusion - lunchtime doubly so. (First series, fit the first.)

R.Wieser

2024-03-28 09:02:11 UTC

J. P. ,

Post by R.Wieser
Again, I do *NOT* want to /monitor/ any changes.

You do, sort of.

:-) You're stretching it.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
WordPad won't re-open a file it already has open. This is arguably a bug,
but that's the way it is.

Ah, thats something different altogether, and something I didn't want to go
into.

No, I do not consider that to be a bug. Making it impossible to have the
same file open multiple times fixes the (in)famous "which window was I
editing in ?" problem.

Its quite likely they didn't think of idiots like me who would have the
audacity to change a files contents while it was already loaded into the
editor. :-)

In that regard you could consider wordpadd not write-locking the underlaying
file as a bug. Though doing so would quite likely riled someone elses
feathers. :-)

Though I do consider wordpad *silently ignoring* the new data to be one.

But, although I would have liked to have seen it differently, it is, as you
say, as it is, and I'll have to work with it.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
I won't say "get over it", because I get very cross when people say that
sort of thing to _me_;

:-| I would consider people saying that kind of stuff as having zero
interest into looking into the matter, and regard their (future) post as
static noise.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
instead, I am trying to understand _why_ you want to do this. Railing
"because it should" will only frustrate you;

...

Post by J. P. Gilliver
If what you were originally trying to do - even if you now won't admit
it!, which was see a changed document - is no longer of interest, but you
want instead to pursue the WordPad bug ad infinitum (ad nauseam), fair
enough, but tell us.

:-) I was not posting because I tried to demand that reality bends to my
will, I was just trying to find out if I perhaps had missed something.

What you consider my "I /have/ to do it that way" stance is likely nothing
more than you noticing that I didn't just drop my question, and expect(ed)
it to be replied to first (and I'm purposely not saying "answered", 'cause
there might well not be one).

What /does/ frustrate (of sorts) me is that most people (here and elsewhere)
do not respond in any way to the question, but jump directly into suggesting
work-arounds.

My question is now two days old and has garnered multiple responses, none of
which give any indication that wordpad can do what I would like it to see
doing.

So, I'm going to assume that it can't, and *now* seriously start considering
other options. And FYI, nothing of what has been suggested in this thread
was new to me.

* using something else than wordpad
* [ap|pre]pending the current date/time to the filename

... well, that was it I think. I already mentioned taskkill myself (in an
attempt to indicate that I already considered possible work-arounds before
posting my question).

Yes, I know I'm rather weird in doing my own homework first, only than to
try to get some specifics about one of the (im)possible options. So sue me.
:-)

Although taskkill didn't want to work for me (I'm not at all sure where
exactly its wm_close message gets send to), a basic FindWindowEx (using the
target windows class and caption) followed by sending it a wm_close to it
does seem to do the trick.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

VanguardLH

2024-03-27 12:22:01 UTC

Couldn't you use a batch script as a wrapper to your program? In the
.bat file, run the program. After it exits, use a 'ren' command to
change the extension from .rtf to .txt.

<program>
ren <name>.rtf <name>.txt

Then when you double-click on the .txt file in Explorer, Notepad will
open. The test I did showed Notepad will work how you want.

However, you don't even need to use Explorer to double-click on the
file. In the batch script, when your program exits, have the script run
Notepad to open the file.

<yourprogram>
notepad <name>.rtf

Regardless of what is the extension, Notepad will load the text file.

J. P. Gilliver

2024-03-27 19:50:23 UTC

Post by VanguardLH
Couldn't you use a batch script as a wrapper to your program? In the
.bat file, run the program. After it exits, use a 'ren' command to
change the extension from .rtf to .txt.
<program>
ren <name>.rtf <name>.txt
Then when you double-click on the .txt file in Explorer, Notepad will
open. The test I did showed Notepad will work how you want.

[]
You're assuming his secret program runs, writes the .rtf file, then
exits. Reading between the lines - which is all we can do, as he won't
tell us what the prog. is! - I gather the mystery program writes the
.rtf (closing it when it has done), then subsequently writes it - with
the same name - _again_. Your "after it exits" assumes it _does_ exit.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Time is an illusion - lunchtime doubly so. (First series, fit the first.)

R.Wieser

2024-03-27 20:45:54 UTC

J. P. ,

You're assuming his secret program runs, writes the .rtf file, then exits.

[snip]

Good one. Yes, the program generates the document and than exits.

then subsequently writes it - with the same name - _again_.

Let me correct that :

Then, *when its run again* (by me), it subsequently writes it - with the
same name - _again_.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

VanguardLH

2024-03-28 01:00:09 UTC

Or that the program halts the batch script until it exits to then run
the next command.

R.Wieser

2024-03-27 20:09:10 UTC

Vanguard,

Post by VanguardLH
Couldn't you use a batch script as a wrapper to your program?

[snip]

Yes, I could.

But all of those try to circumvent the problem itself (which will still rear
its ugly head in other circumstances where the origional files contents
change) as well as having their own side effects.

I think that taskkill (which I mentioned in my initial post) is one of the
few "solutions" (hacks) which seems to have no side effects - even though
its usage seems to be limited to where a script launches the changed
document.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

VanguardLH

2024-03-28 01:21:36 UTC

Post by R.Wieser
Vanguard,

Post by VanguardLH
Couldn't you use a batch script as a wrapper to your program?

Yes, I could.
But all of those try to circumvent the problem itself (which will still rear
its ugly head in other circumstances where the origional files contents
change) as well as having their own side effects.
I think that taskkill (which I mentioned in my initial post) is one of the
few "solutions" (hacks) which seems to have no side effects - even though
its usage seems to be limited to where a script launches the changed
document.
Regards,
Rudy Wieser

The problem is that you refuse to acknowledge that Wordpad won't do what
you want, and keep expecting someone to come up with a solution where
Wordpad has command-line arguments other than filespec and /p (for
printing). There are no other command-line args to Wordpad, including
no arg for forcing a flush of its buffer nor an arg to force a close of
the current doc to get a new copy loaded in its buffer.

Either you're stuck with how Wordpad functions, or you use a different
editor that does do what you want. For some unknown reason, you are are
averse to using anything other than Wordpad. There are far better
editors that can read RTF files. You refuse the obvious in renaming the
output file. Wordpad got bundled into Windows over 28 years ago.

The only advantage Wordpad has over Notepad is Wordpad supports RTF
(bold, italics, fonts, etc). Although touched on before, you've yet to
disclose if the program's output is RTF at all, or just plain text
dumped into a .rtf file.

If you insist on using Wordpad, there is no good solution for you.
Using taskkill is no more a better a solution than others offered. In
fact, some suggestions require less effort than you using taskkill.
Well, if that's your preference then go with it. You asked how to solve
the problem besides using taskkill, but you're adamant on using Wordpad
and taskkill. You started with that solution, and are determined to
continue using it. If it's how you want, go for it.

I don't see how taskkill is a solution. You open Wordpad with a file,
you want to open another instance of Wordpad to the same but
since-changed file, but you involve taskkill to eliminate the earlier
instance of Wordpad. Why can't you just exit the earlier instance
before you load the next one? No having to find the PID of the prior
instance of Wordpad. No having to open a command shell to run "taskkill
/i wordpad.exe /f" (which would take out both the old and new instances
of Wordpad unless you wait until after taskkill to open the new
instance). No having to dig into Task Manager to kill the old instance.
Just click on the "X" titlebar icon in the old instance before you load
the new instance of Wordpad.

Newyana2

2024-03-28 03:27:05 UTC

"VanguardLH" <***@nguard.LH> wrote

| The problem is that you refuse to acknowledge that Wordpad won't do what
| you want, and keep expecting someone to come up with a solution

That's always the way with Rudy. If he wanted a solution
he would have detailed the issue, explaining what he needs
to achieve. But what he really wants is to snipp about how
people are too dumb for him to tolerate. Then again, you keep
playing along, so.... :)

R.Wieser

2024-03-28 10:29:01 UTC

Newyana2,

If he wanted a solution he would have detailed the issue,
explaining what he needs to achieve.

Like this perhaps ?

[quote=me, initial message]
The problem is that when the document is open and I re-generate the document
and double-click it I still see the old contents.
....
Is there a way to override this behaviour using a command-line argument ?
[/quote]

So, two mistakes :

1) I didn't ask for a solution, I asked a basic "does this exist?" question.

2) You got exactly what you claim you didn't get.

But what he really wants is to snipp about how people are
too dumb for him to tolerate

You know what *I* think is dumb ? People who cannot bring themselves to
answer a simple question, and than bitch about it as if its the other
persons fault. :-(

Regards,
Rudy Wieser.

Paul

2024-03-28 15:32:24 UTC

Post by R.Wieser
Like this perhaps ?
[quote=me, initial message]
The problem is that when the document is open and I re-generate the document
and double-click it I still see the old contents.
....
Is there a way to override this behaviour using a command-line argument ?
[/quote]

< >

"Here is a ham bone."

"Uh, that ham bone has no meat on it."

"But I expect you to chew on it, and make
noises like you're enjoying it."

You already knew what the answer to the
question was, before you asked it.

*******

The source code for Windows XP was stolen.
That means, somewhere, there's a copy of Wordpad source for WinXP.

https://www.reddit.com/r/windows/comments/j06a3z/so_i_got_my_hands_on_the_original_windows_xp/

https://linuxreviews.org/42.9_GB_Of_Microsoft_Source_Code_Leaked:_Historicans_Can_Now_Study_The_Source_Code_For_MS-Dos_3.3_To_Windows_XP

Paul

R.Wieser

2024-03-28 17:51:57 UTC

Paul,

Post by Paul
You already knew what the answer to the
question was, before you asked it.

Yes, and ? What do you mean by saying it ?

And no, I did not know for certain. That is why I asked. To make sure.

Are you telling me that that is a bad approach ? 'Cause if you would I
would strongly disagree with you.

Post by Paul
The source code for Windows XP was stolen.
That means, somewhere, there's a copy of Wordpad source for WinXP.

Thanks.

But as reddit is dependant on JS being available its largely a no-go area
for me. I would have liked to be able to have the sourcefiles of a few
programs available though.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

J. P. Gilliver

2024-03-28 18:45:34 UTC

In message <uu4aog$3nl5h$***@dont-email.me> at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:51:57,
R.Wieser <***@is.invalid> writes
[attrib. missing]

Post by Paul
The source code for Windows XP was stolen.
That means, somewhere, there's a copy of Wordpad source for WinXP.

Thanks.
But as reddit is dependant on JS being available its largely a no-go area
for me. I would have liked to be able to have the sourcefiles of a few
programs available though.

Apparently it's at
<http://51.255.68.3:8011/Microsoft%20leaked%20source%20code%20archive_202
0-09-24/nt5src.7z>, or was three years ago (I haven't tried fetching
it); it's either 2.93 GB or about 50 GB (I think the smaller [one post
says "The code for XP is 3GB ish but there's also a larger 50GB torrent
that also includes Windows Server 2003, MS-DOS 6, and a whole lotta Bill
Gates conspiracy videos."]); and the password is internaldev.

Post by R.Wieser
Regards,
Rudy Wieser

John G.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

There should be a place on the ballot paper for 'None of the above', and if
enough people filled that in, the system might start to change. - Jeremy
Paxman in RT, 2014/1/25-31

R.Wieser

2024-03-28 19:20:20 UTC

J. P. ,

Apparently it's at [snip], or was three years ago

Thanks. Thats about the same time back as the linux article Paul linked
to.

it's either 2.93 GB or about 50 GB (I think the smaller [one post says
"The code for XP is 3GB ish but there's also a larger 50GB torrent that
also includes Windows Server 2003, MS-DOS 6, and a whole lotta Bill Gates
conspiracy videos."]);

Alas, I just tried with the HTTP as well as the HTTPS prefix, but the
connection fails either way.

Though googeling for the filename gives a few hits that I could look into.

I hope I will find a magnet link, as my downloader normally shows all the
included files, where I than can de-select the unwanted ones (just the XP
branch is currently enough for me).

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

J. P. Gilliver

2024-03-28 19:29:21 UTC

Post by R.Wieser
J. P. ,

Apparently it's at [snip], or was three years ago

Thanks. Thats about the same time back as the linux article Paul linked
to.

Alas, I just tried with the HTTP as well as the HTTPS prefix, but the
connection fails either way.
Though googeling for the filename gives a few hits that I could look into.
I hope I will find a magnet link, as my downloader normally shows all the
included files, where I than can de-select the unwanted ones (just the XP
branch is currently enough for me).
Regards,
Rudy Wieser

One of the posts in the Reddit article:
===
Working torrent magnet link for Win XP source. 46Gb. Only for research
purposes.

magnet:?xt=urn:btih:3d8b16242b56a3aafb8da7b5fc83ef993ebcf35b&dn=Microsoft
%20leaked%20source%20code%20archive_2020-09-24

XP source is located in this archive: nt5src.rar
===
I'd ignored it, as I had no idea what it was about (I've never used
torrent, and guessed it was something to do with that).

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

My movies rise below vulgarity. - Mel Brooks, quoted by Barry Norman in RT
2016/11/26-12/2

R.Wieser

2024-03-29 09:08:28 UTC

J. P. ,

Post by J. P. Gilliver
magnet:?xt=urn:btih:3d8b16242b56a3aafb8da7b5fc83ef993ebcf35b&dn=Microsoft
%20leaked%20source%20code%20archive_2020-09-24
XP source is located in this archive: nt5src.rar

When saving the link I noticed it matches the first part of the magnet-link
provided on the linux webpage Paul linked to ...

Nonetheless, Thank you. :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Newyana2

2024-03-28 18:58:57 UTC

"Paul" <***@needed.invalid> wrote

| The source code for Windows XP was stolen.
| That means, somewhere, there's a copy of Wordpad source for WinXP.
|

In VBClassic and probably in .Net there are simple wrapper
controls for the MS RichEdit library. It's actually not a big deal
to create a Wordpad type of program. But does anyone use
it anymore? I used to use it for help files and such where I
wanted formatting, but HTML is more flexible and looks nicer.
There's something about the display of bold text in RTF that
always looked clunky to me.

Paul

2024-03-28 21:09:52 UTC

Post by Newyana2
| The source code for Windows XP was stolen.
| That means, somewhere, there's a copy of Wordpad source for WinXP.
|
In VBClassic and probably in .Net there are simple wrapper
controls for the MS RichEdit library. It's actually not a big deal
to create a Wordpad type of program. But does anyone use
it anymore? I used to use it for help files and such where I
wanted formatting, but HTML is more flexible and looks nicer.
There's something about the display of bold text in RTF that
always looked clunky to me.

As it's source code, you have "the materials for a good time".

Who can say how easy it is to use, that stuff. Me just getting
some version of Visual Studio home edition to work, is hard enough
right now. Let alone actually edit some source.

Paul

Paul

2024-03-28 06:12:02 UTC

Post by R.Wieser
Vanguard,

Post by VanguardLH
Couldn't you use a batch script as a wrapper to your program?

And CoPilot told me that WordPad has no API for interaction.
Wordpad is not a full-featured widget.

Maybe there is some way that a program could MMAP a file,
and then use some interface that tells it the file has
been changed on disk. The other option is the NTFS change
journal (FAT has no equivalent of that). The SearchIndexer
uses the change journal, and Everything.exe also uses
the change journal, to be informed of file system changes.
(You then apply a filter to the list, to only get
the changes you care about, such as a single file
you happen to have open at the moment.)

I've had editors warn me before, about changes
had been made since the file was opened, so I've
at least seen this feature in action.

While you could try LibreOffice Writer as an RTF proofer,
or OpenOffice Writer, We don't really know if they work
exactly like the Microsoft parser or not. I've always
found RTF to be a waste of time as an interchange mechanism.
Even if you take RTF from one Microsoft tool and feed
it to another Microsoft tool, there are no guarantees
on the outcome or the appearance.

Paul

VanguardLH

2024-03-28 07:34:00 UTC

Post by Paul
And CoPilot told me that WordPad has no API for interaction.
Wordpad is not a full-featured widget.
Maybe there is some way that a program could MMAP a file,
and then use some interface that tells it the file has
been changed on disk. The other option is the NTFS change
journal (FAT has no equivalent of that). The SearchIndexer
uses the change journal, and Everything.exe also uses
the change journal, to be informed of file system changes.
(You then apply a filter to the list, to only get
the changes you care about, such as a single file
you happen to have open at the moment.)
I've had editors warn me before, about changes
had been made since the file was opened, so I've
at least seen this feature in action.
While you could try LibreOffice Writer as an RTF proofer,
or OpenOffice Writer, We don't really know if they work
exactly like the Microsoft parser or not. I've always
found RTF to be a waste of time as an interchange mechanism.
Even if you take RTF from one Microsoft tool and feed
it to another Microsoft tool, there are no guarantees
on the outcome or the appearance.

RTF is pretty old (c.1987), but ASCII is much older. Microsoft dropped
RTF back in 2008. Within those 20 years came up with several versions
listed at:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Text_Format

Which version a program supports depends on just how portable a doc is
between different programs. This is akin to the numerous versions of
Adobe's PDF that came out over many years.

Wordpad sucks as an RTF editor. As mentioned, if a file gets too big
(how big is unknown), you can lose content (gets corrupted, tail end of
doc gets truncated). You spend a lot of time editing a doc only to find
out later not only are your edits are gone, but so is some other
content. Wordpad is a great trashing tool.

I just checked, and there are over 10K .rtf files on my C: drive, many
of which are for EULA or license docs. Most are under 300 KB in size,
so not too bad. One is 27 MB for a readme.rtf in Thief 2. When opened
in Wordpad, there is no way that content needs to consume 27 MB. When
"printed" to a PDF, the .pdf file is 1.4 MB.

However, tis likely that Rudy's "program" does have any configuration
settings to let him choose a different document format nor the extension
for its output file. That's why solutions regarding Wordpad are
reactive workarounds. Rudy is stuck with the behavior of the "program".
He isn't stuck with the behavior of Wordpad.

VanguardLH

2024-03-28 07:35:26 UTC

Post by VanguardLH
However, tis likely that Rudy's "program" does have any configuration

^___ not

Post by VanguardLH
settings to let him choose a different document format nor the extension
for its output file. That's why solutions regarding Wordpad are
reactive workarounds. Rudy is stuck with the behavior of the "program".
He isn't stuck with the behavior of Wordpad.

Newyana2

2024-03-28 12:25:32 UTC

"VanguardLH" <***@nguard.LH> wrote

| I just checked, and there are over 10K .rtf files on my C: drive, many
| of which are for EULA or license docs. Most are under 300 KB in size,
| so not too bad. One is 27 MB for a readme.rtf in Thief 2. When opened
| in Wordpad, there is no way that content needs to consume 27 MB.

Maybe images? I checked my system. I have 105 RTFs. If you
have over 10K then it sounds like it's time for some housecleaning.

I've used a RichEdit window for many years in my own code editor.
It's wonderfully powerful and the format is published. Though I'd
agree that Wordpad/Write is not very useful. It's the power of RTF
squeezed through a narrow funnel. If I want attractive formatting
I use HTML. These days, an HTML file can even have the images
embedded inline as base64. I keep VBScripts on my desktop to do
just that.

J. P. Gilliver

2024-03-28 12:54:40 UTC

Post by Newyana2
| I just checked, and there are over 10K .rtf files on my C: drive, many
| of which are for EULA or license docs. Most are under 300 KB in size,
| so not too bad. One is 27 MB for a readme.rtf in Thief 2. When opened
| in Wordpad, there is no way that content needs to consume 27 MB.
Maybe images? I checked my system. I have 105 RTFs. If you
have over 10K then it sounds like it's time for some housecleaning.

262 here (all but 15 on C:, so not created by me), all but 7 under your
300K threshold.

I'm guessing VLH has something that makes them, possibly as a
transitional stage that it's not cleaning up properly. Everything.exe is
great for looking there - you can sort by date modified, size, or path
(and it remembers your choice, so I don't know what's the default -
probably name).

Post by Newyana2
I've used a RichEdit window for many years in my own code editor.
It's wonderfully powerful and the format is published. Though I'd
agree that Wordpad/Write is not very useful. It's the power of RTF
squeezed through a narrow funnel. If I want attractive formatting
I use HTML. These days, an HTML file can even have the images
embedded inline as base64. I keep VBScripts on my desktop to do
just that.

Is that what the "save as single file" option some browsers offer does?

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Who is Art, and why does life imitate him?

Newyana2

2024-03-28 19:04:17 UTC

"J. P. Gilliver" <***@255soft.uk> wrote

| > I've used a RichEdit window for many years in my own code editor.
| >It's wonderfully powerful and the format is published. Though I'd
| >agree that Wordpad/Write is not very useful. It's the power of RTF
| >squeezed through a narrow funnel. If I want attractive formatting
| >I use HTML. These days, an HTML file can even have the images
| >embedded inline as base64. I keep VBScripts on my desktop to do
| >just that.
| >
| Is that what the "save as single file" option some browsers offer does?

I've never noticed that option. I'll have to check it out.
Mostly I've only used the option for my own purposes and
not with large images. The HTML can get very clunky if
you're saving a bloated page with big images. So personally
I'd just save them in a folder if I want them. But sometimes
I write HTML for my own purposes and need images embedded.
For instance, I have a page to help identify garden trace
elements missing by looking at leaf irregularities. There are lots
of images, but they're all small, so it was a perfect use for
embedding.

J. P. Gilliver

2024-03-28 19:26:15 UTC

[]

Post by Newyana2
| >I use HTML. These days, an HTML file can even have the images
| >embedded inline as base64. I keep VBScripts on my desktop to do
| >just that.
| >
| Is that what the "save as single file" option some browsers offer does?
I've never noticed that option. I'll have to check it out.
Mostly I've only used the option for my own purposes and
not with large images. The HTML can get very clunky if
you're saving a bloated page with big images. So personally
I'd just save them in a folder if I want them. But sometimes

[]
I had the feeling that at least Firefox used to use a different
extension when saving as a single file, but now (I let it update not too
long ago) both Firefox and Chrome* use the same extension (a choice of
.htm or .html) whether saving "single file" or "complete", so I may be
wrong about that.

* At first I'd typed Chrime. I rather liked that (-:

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

My movies rise below vulgarity. - Mel Brooks, quoted by Barry Norman in RT
2016/11/26-12/2

VanguardLH

2024-03-28 19:57:48 UTC

262 here (all but 15 on C:, so not created by me), all but 7 under your
300K threshold.
I'm guessing VLH has something that makes them, possibly as a
transitional stage that it's not cleaning up properly. Everything.exe is
great for looking there - you can sort by date modified, size, or path
(and it remembers your choice, so I don't know what's the default -
probably name).

As I said, most are EULA.rtf or license.rtf files. I used voidtools'
[Search] Everything, not Windows Search to find *.rtf files. Only 19
are in my Downloads folder of which most are provide license info in
several languages (locales). 254 are under the WinSxS folder where
multiple versions of system files are stored to allow compatibility with
apps that want old versions. You sure whatever you used to search for
*.rtf files looked everywhere?

9492 are for rollup fixes (under C:\Windows\servicing\LCU\). I'm not
yet sure that I want to remove the Last Cumulative Update folders that
can undo a cumulative update, but then I rely on daily scheduled image
backups to restore the exact prior state of my drives. When I run Disk
Cleanup (cleanmgr.exe) on the C: drive, and select to scan system files,
LCU might be the "Windows Update Cleanup" option which is deselected, by
default, and reports consuming 5.76 GB. On a 1 TB drive with only 98 GB
used, 5 GB isn't of much concern. I'll put that cleanup in a reminder
sticky to run after the next monthly scheduled full image backup.

Apparently the Stickies app I use for notes (I don't like the one in
Windows 10) uses RTF to allow formatting in my notes. I can't remember
ever pasting an image into any sticky note. As for formatting, mostly
that's to add a bulleted list in the note. The app makes backups, and
there are many of those. Stickies come and go, but their backups
remain. I could clean out the backups (ran daily) to keep just the last
one (and the current notes), but that only eliminates a couple hundred.
It has an option "Keep the most recent N backups" (I set it to 15), but
guess that's not working. Those are 1 to 2 KB each. Compared to the
9492 RTF files stored under the LCU folder, Stickies use of RTF files
and saving backups is a miniscule concern.

I was only definite on how many files there were total. The 300KB size
is my eyes watching the Size column as I scroll the very long list while
looking to find a typical maximum size, and ignore the occasional big
jump (outliers). The list is too big for Everything (it hangs) to
select the entire list to right-click to get aggregate properties to
find their total space consumption. The big reduction will come when I
later run Disk Cleanup to get rid of the LCU subfolders.

J. P. Gilliver

2024-03-28 20:39:41 UTC

262 here (all but 15 on C:, so not created by me), all but 7 under your
300K threshold.
I'm guessing VLH has something that makes them, possibly as a
transitional stage that it's not cleaning up properly. Everything.exe is
great for looking there - you can sort by date modified, size, or path
(and it remembers your choice, so I don't know what's the default -
probably name).

As I said, most are EULA.rtf or license.rtf files. I used voidtools'
[Search] Everything, not Windows Search to find *.rtf files. Only 19

As did I (Everything.exe). Of my 262 objects, 50 are EULA (well, two
EULA and 48 eula) - some in C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework, the rest
in C:\Windows\WindowsMobile (apart from one I had downloaded). Another
150 are license (well, two are License), and ten license_<language>. So
that accounts for 210 of my 262 .rtf objects.

Post by VanguardLH
are in my Downloads folder of which most are provide license info in
several languages (locales). 254 are under the WinSxS folder where

103 of my .rtf objects are in winsxs, 89 of which are license.

Post by VanguardLH
multiple versions of system files are stored to allow compatibility with
apps that want old versions. You sure whatever you used to search for
*.rtf files looked everywhere?

It's found them on C: and D:. (Only 15 on D: - it's not a filetype I use
much.)

Post by VanguardLH
9492 are for rollup fixes (under C:\Windows\servicing\LCU\). I'm not
yet sure that I want to remove the Last Cumulative Update folders that
can undo a cumulative update, but then I rely on daily scheduled image
backups to restore the exact prior state of my drives. When I run Disk
Cleanup (cleanmgr.exe) on the C: drive, and select to scan system files,
LCU might be the "Windows Update Cleanup" option which is deselected, by
default, and reports consuming 5.76 GB. On a 1 TB drive with only 98 GB
used, 5 GB isn't of much concern. I'll put that cleanup in a reminder
sticky to run after the next monthly scheduled full image backup.
Apparently the Stickies app I use for notes (I don't like the one in
Windows 10) uses RTF to allow formatting in my notes. I can't remember

Ah, are you on 10? I'm on 7. That might explain the difference/bloat.
[]

Post by VanguardLH
I was only definite on how many files there were total. The 300KB size
is my eyes watching the Size column as I scroll the very long list while
looking to find a typical maximum size, and ignore the occasional big
jump (outliers). The list is too big for Everything (it hangs) to
select the entire list to right-click to get aggregate properties to
find their total space consumption. The big reduction will come when I
later run Disk Cleanup to get rid of the LCU subfolders.

You can click the Size column heading in Everything, unless that crashes
it too with that many hits. My 263 come to 56.2 MB. (Oh, 260 - it had
picked up three .rtf.lnk where I'd clicked during this discussion, to
see what some of them were.)

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Find out what works. Then do it. That's my system. I'm always surprised it
isn't more popular. - Scott Adams, 2015

R.Wieser

2024-03-28 09:27:55 UTC

Vanguard,

Post by VanguardLH
The problem is that you refuse to acknowledge that Wordpad won't
do what you want,

Do tell me where you have posted that you think that that wordpad can't do
it.

*Thats* the problem.

For all I know none of you have got a clue, therefore ignore it and continue
with suggesting, possibly quite unneeded, work-arounds. And yes, that has
happend to me before.

Post by VanguardLH
If you insist on using Wordpad, there is no good solution for you.

I think that the others here will thank you for that assessment. :-)

Ofcourse, with the definition to your "good solution" being up for grabs it
doesn't mean too much.

Post by VanguardLH
Using taskkill is no more a better a solution than others offered.

I beg to differ. But as you have not brought forward any "and this is why"
to it there is nothing we could discuss in that direction ...

Post by VanguardLH
You open Wordpad with a file, you want to open another instance of
Wordpad to the same but since-changed file, but you involve taskkill
to eliminate the earlier instance of Wordpad. Why can't you just
exit the earlier instance before you load the next one?

I can, and currently have to.

But I thought I made it rather clear why I wanted to eliminate that manual
middle step (and why!). If not I suggest you re-read the thread, I've
mentioned it multiple times.

Post by VanguardLH
No having to find the PID of the prior instance of Wordpad.

:-) And with that you show that you have no clue how that taskkill works.

Suggestion : Open a command prompt, type "taskkill /?" and read. You might
learn something.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

VanguardLH

2024-03-28 20:05:51 UTC

Post by R.Wieser
Vanguard,

Post by VanguardLH
The problem is that you refuse to acknowledge that Wordpad won't
do what you want,

Do tell me where you have posted that you think that that wordpad can't do
it.
*Thats* the problem.

Syntax: wordpad [/p] <filespec>

That's it. Get over your desire for Wordpad to have more args. You can
pray as much as you like, but sometimes God says No.

I can, and currently have to.
But I thought I made it rather clear why I wanted to eliminate that
manual middle step (and why!). If not I suggest you re-read the
thread, I've mentioned it multiple times.

You're going to leave Wordpad windows open indefinitely until sometime
later when you shutdown Windows?

Post by VanguardLH
No having to find the PID of the prior instance of Wordpad.

And with that you show that you have no clue how that taskkill works.

I suggest *YOU* run at the command line:

taskkill /?

Specifying the PID is one way. Specifying the image name is another,
but takes out all processes with the same image name.

Really that hard for you to read the syntax description to see PID is
one way to specify what process to kill? What the hell do you think the
/pid argument is for? Of course, in your snipping, you handily omit
that I mention using the /im argument to specify the image name.

You must specify WHAT to kill? So, how do you do it for taskkill?
Apparently you profess that you don't use /pid or /im, so how ELSE do
you use taskkill?

R.Wieser

2024-03-29 10:11:14 UTC

Vanguard,

Post by VanguardLH
The problem is that you refuse to acknowledge that Wordpad won't
do what you want,

Do tell me where you have posted that you think that that wordpad can't do
it.
*Thats* the problem.

Syntax: wordpad [/p] <filespec>
That's it. Get over your desire for Wordpad to have more args.

You seem to have a problem with your chronology.

I did not ask you if you *now* can come up with something, I asked you where
you did *before* chewing me out over it.

... or did you hope I would not notice what you did ? :-)

And by the way, I seem to have found information where you can, from the
commandline, select a different printer. IOW, an indication that "{command}
/?" doen't always tell you everything (something I have also seen in regard
to other MS programs).

Post by VanguardLH
You're going to leave Wordpad windows open indefinitely until
sometime later when you shutdown Windows?

:-) You're fishing for reasons to why you can claim I'm wrong, and than
retroactivily put that onto the current case, aren't you ?

Post by VanguardLH
taskkill /?
Specifying the PID is one way. Specifying the image name is another,
but takes out all processes with the same image name.

I suggest you do that again yourself, and now /actually read/ what it says.

Hint : the "/FI" argument.

Post by VanguardLH
Really that hard for you to read the syntax description to see
PID is one way to specify what process to kill?

I noticed, yes. The problem is that you said, in relation to what *I* was
doing, "No having to find the PID of the prior instance of Wordpad.".

No, I didn't need a PID, so its anybodies guess (although I have a suspicion
or two) to why you mentioned it.

Post by VanguardLH
Apparently you profess that you don't use /pid or /im,

You /realy/ have a reading problem, don't you ? I challenge you to quote
where I said that I dodn't use /im. I'll even go further : quote where I
mentioned /any/ of taskkill's arguments - *before* you tried to make claims
to how I did it wrong ofcourse.

Post by VanguardLH
so how ELSE do you use taskkill?

Kid, your "you're wrong!" only exists because you, on purpose or otherwise,
change what /has/ being said into something that better serves your own
goals.

You're not the first one, and you'll likely will not be the last one trying
it either. :-(

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

VanguardLH

2024-03-29 17:08:35 UTC

Post by R.Wieser
Vanguard,

Post by VanguardLH
The problem is that you refuse to acknowledge that Wordpad won't
do what you want,

Do tell me where you have posted that you think that that wordpad
can't do it.
*Thats* the problem.

Syntax: wordpad [/p] <filespec>
That's it. Get over your desire for Wordpad to have more args.

See Message-ID <***@v.nguard.lh> where I mentioned filespec
and /p arguments, and only those. I said that 3 days ago. That was my
first response.

Post by R.Wieser
And by the way, I seem to have found information where you can, from
the commandline, select a different printer.

Yep, mentioned the /p arg back in my first response, too.

Post by VanguardLH
You're going to leave Wordpad windows open indefinitely until
sometime later when you shutdown Windows?

: -) You're fishing for reasons to why you can claim I'm wrong, and
: than retroactivily put that onto the current case, aren't you ?

And you divert via lambaste by not saying why you need to keep Wordpad
open between separate runs on your program. To have you clarify, you
run your program, open Wordpad, and then immediately run your program
again? How often do you run the "program"?

Post by VanguardLH
taskkill /?
Specifying the PID is one way. Specifying the image name is another,
but takes out all processes with the same image name.

I suggest you do that again yourself, and now /actually read/ what it says.
Hint : the "/FI" argument.

Which can also specify image name or PID. Window title can also be
specified, but all instances of Wordpad you open to the same file will
have "<samefilespec> - WordPad" as their title, so no different than
using "/im wordpad". Well, I didn't think about you having other
instances of Wordpad open to edit other files since the topic herein was
about you using Wordpad on the same file created by your "program". If
you have other instances of Wordpad open at the time, and they loaded
different files, then /im wordpad would nail more than those just for
the program's output file.

Post by VanguardLH
Really that hard for you to read the syntax description to see
PID is one way to specify what process to kill?

I noticed, yes. The problem is that you said, in relation to what *I*
was doing, "No having to find the PID of the prior instance of
Wordpad.".
No, I didn't need a PID, so its anybodies guess (although I have a suspicion
or two) to why you mentioned it.

Have you yet disclosed just how you are running taskkill? With which
args? Your "program" remains a mystery, and so does how you use
taskkill. I'm not wasting time discussing every permutation of args and
their values to cover every way taskkill can be used. Stop hiding.

Post by VanguardLH
Apparently you profess that you don't use /pid or /im,

Exactly. You deliberately leave obtuse just how you use taskkill, so
others have to guess how you use it. Stop hiding.

Post by VanguardLH
so how ELSE do you use taskkill?

Kid, your "you're wrong!" only exists because you, on purpose or
otherwise, change what /has/ being said into something that better
serves your own goals.

And you're still hiding. Instead of answering on how you use taskkill,
you obfuscate again.

R.Wieser

2024-03-29 20:47:46 UTC

Vanguard,

Post by R.Wieser
I did not ask you if you *now* can come up with something, I asked
you where you did *before* chewing me out over it.
... or did you hope I would not notice what you did ? :-)

filespec and /p arguments, and only those. I said that 3 days ago.
That was my first response.

Ah yes, I see it, at the bottom of a post starting with pedantry (I didn't
think you liked that) and other information unrelated to my question. Quite
likely why I didn't finish reading it all of it.

But yes, its there. My apologies for not noticing it.

See, thats how easy it can be to acknowledge a mistake.

Post by R.Wieser
And by the way, I seem to have found information where you can,
from the commandline, select a different printer.

Yep, mentioned the /p arg back in my first response, too.

Alas, there you go again, reading what you want to read, not whats actually
posted.

You don't agree ? Thats simple, show me where you mentioned /selecting a
different printer from wordpads commandline/.

Post by VanguardLH
You're going to leave Wordpad windows open indefinitely until
sometime later when you shutdown Windows?

: -) You're fishing for reasons to why you can claim I'm wrong, and
: than retroactivily put that onto the current case, aren't you ?

And you divert via lambaste by not saying why you need to keep Wordpad
open between separate runs on your program.

Ah yes, first conjuring up a situation outof thin air, and than when I make
rather clear that I'm not going to humour you in that, you change your tune
and try to make it sound as if you said/ment something quite different.

As for /why/ I do it ? Thats as little your concern as the program I
generate the document with was to J. P. . And yes, you're /still/ fishing
for something you can complain about.

Post by VanguardLH
Specifying the PID is one way. Specifying the image name is another,
but takes out all processes with the same image name.

I suggest you do that again yourself, and now /actually read/ what it says.
Hint : the "/FI" argument.

Which can also specify image name or PID.

:-) Ah yes, trying to divert attention away from you having made a mistake.

Golly, you do not like pedantry when I do it, but you have no problem doing
it yourself (in your first reply, way before I did). And just here you make
it clear you do not like it when (you think) I try to divert attention, but
here you are, doing it yourself !

There is a word for people like you. Hypocrite.

Have you yet disclosed just how you are running taskkill?
With which args?

Why would I need to do disclose that ? Its part of the work/around *I*
brewed - before even posting the problem here I might say. You have zero
right to any of it.

Your "program" remains a mystery,

Good. That way you could not be sidetracked by it either.

And you're still hiding. Instead of answering on how you use
taskkill, you obfuscate again.

Lol.

Pray tell, what would, or even /could/ I be hiding in that regard ?

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

VanguardLH

2024-03-29 21:58:13 UTC

Post by R.Wieser
Vanguard,

Post by R.Wieser
And by the way, I seem to have found information where you can,
from the commandline, select a different printer.

Yep, mentioned the /p arg back in my first response, too.

show me where you mentioned /selecting a different printer from
wordpads commandline/.

Again, "Yep, mentioned the /p arg back in my first response, too."

If /p doesn't work, try /pt. You "discovered" what was already told to
you before.

Post by R.Wieser
As for /why/ I do it ? Thats as little your concern as the program I
generate the document with was to J. P. . And yes, you're /still/ fishing
for something you can complain about.

Oh, we're supposed to come up with a solution to a vague scenario. Your
request was answered days ago: Wordpad has no other arguments than
filespec and /p. Others, and I, tried to provide workarounds. You
chose to stick with your taskkill workaround.

Post by R.Wieser
Hint : the "/FI" argument.

Which can also specify image name or PID.

Ah yes, trying to divert attention away from you having made a
mistake.

I made no mistake. No reason to use /FI with a condition testing on PID
or image name versus just using /pid <pid> or /im <imagename>. Go ahead
and make it harder if you want.

The only feature /fi adds is testing on window title, but you still have
not disclosed how you use taskkill to know if that's how you kill, plus
it won't work any better than /im if you keep reopening the same file.

Post by VanguardLH
Have you yet disclosed just how you are running taskkill?
With which args?

Why would I need to do disclose that ?

I gave specifics on how to use taskkill. You kept it a secret.

Post by VanguardLH
Your "program" remains a mystery,

Good. That way you could not be sidetracked by it either.

Because if you had identified the program, or noted it was a script,
others might've helped you with configuring the program or modifying it
to version by timestamp its output file allowing to both keep a history
of those files, if you chose, along with eliminating the problem with
Wordpad upon which you are fixated.

Wordpad can't be fixed unless you get its code to create NewWordpad with
MDI support, or add a buffer flush command-line arg, or however you wish
it to function. It doesn't have the feature or command-line arguments
you would like it to have. The program might be changed to timestamp
version its output file to eliminate the same-file problem with Wordpad,
but you don't want to look there. Workarounds allow for renaming the
output file, but you don't want those, either. Your use of taskkill is
just another workaround.

R.Wieser

2024-03-30 08:43:15 UTC

Vanguard,

Post by R.Wieser
show me where you mentioned /selecting a different printer from
from wordpads commandline/.

Again, "Yep, mentioned the /p arg back in my first response, too."

Ah yes, the "/p which is somehow used for printing" there does explain how
to select a different printer adequatily ofcourse. As does your
once-or-twice posted "wordpad [/p] <filespec>". I see, my bad. /s

Kid, you really suck at your game. Maybe honesty will serve you better.

Post by VanguardLH
If /p doesn't work, try /pt.

You can ofcourse quote where you (or anyone else) said that ? No ? Why am
I not surprised ...

Post by VanguardLH
Oh, we're supposed to come up with a solution to a vague scenario.

Lol.

If you think my scenario as described in my initial post is vague than you
no doubt will see blurry on even the clearest days. There are no specs
that will be able to correct it.

Post by VanguardLH
I gave specifics on how to use taskkill. You kept it a secret.

Huh? If you gave the specifics than where/what can the secret be ? You
already know everything. /s

And I distinctly remember having clued you in on the existence of the /FI
argument. So no, you didn't.

Now if you would have been a nice kid and /asked/ for it I /could/ have
decided to provide that information. But now ? Fat chance.

Post by R.Wieser
Ah yes, trying to divert attention away from you having made a
mistake.

I made no mistake. No reason to use /FI with a condition testing on
PID or image name versus just using /pid <pid> or /im <imagename>.

You're right, there is absolutily no reason to do that. I give you that.

... The only problem is that I never said that that was what you needed to
do to fix your problem.

So yes, you definitily made a mistake. Multiple even. The biggest one that
you stopped looking for something that /would/ have a reason to be used.
And yes, thats another hint.

Post by VanguardLH
Because if you had identified the program, or noted it was a
script, others might've helped you with configuring the program

I didn't ask for that. I also was quite clear in stating that I wanted a
generic solution, not one that would be specific to my thanwhile situation.

You wish to refuse to acknowledge and work with that ? Well, thats not my
problem, is it ?

Besides, when I posted my question I indicated that I already had a working
solution. So, your offered help was quite unneeded.

Post by VanguardLH
Wordpad can't be fixed unless you get its code to create NewWordpad
with MDI support, or add a buffer flush command-line arg, or however
you wish it to function.

Who said I wanted to fix wordpad itself ? I just wanted a generic solution
applicable to what wordpad does - or rather, /doesn't/ do - when
double-clicking a document file.

Post by VanguardLH
Your use of taskkill is just another workaround.

"Just ? I seem to remember to having said to you that its the one with the
least ammount of side-effects. Shucks, I can't remember you ever having
responded to that. I wonder why ...

But you ofcourse have a better solution ? No, I didn't think so. Ah yes,
that might be the above "why" .... :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

R.Wieser

2024-04-05 08:33:03 UTC

Vanguard,

I see you have decided not to back up your claims to what I and you said. I
can't say I'm surprised.

Kid, don't *ever* try to put words into someones mouth here. Its /way/ to
easy for the other to go back thru the posts and check what was actually
said.

Others may than just (rightfully so) stop responding to you, but I'm a bit
different and instead call you out for it.

And by the way: we had pretty-much the same conversation about 7 months ago.
IOW, you didn't learn from it.

And oh yeah, don't try to /demand/ information from someone. That never
ends well.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Kerr-Mudd, John

2024-04-05 09:01:03 UTC

On Fri, 5 Apr 2024 10:33:03 +0200

Post by R.Wieser
Vanguard,
I see you have decided not to back up your claims to what I and you said. I
can't say I'm surprised.
Kid, don't *ever* try to put words into someones mouth here. Its /way/ to
easy for the other to go back thru the posts and check what was actually
said.
Others may than just (rightfully so) stop responding to you, but I'm a bit
different and instead call you out for it.
And by the way: we had pretty-much the same conversation about 7 months ago.
IOW, you didn't learn from it.
And oh yeah, don't try to /demand/ information from someone. That never
ends well.

Enough trolling. If you'd genuinely wanted help you'd have been grateful
for suggestions, and more forthcoming about your "program".

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

R.Wieser

2024-04-05 09:59:55 UTC

John,

Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
Enough trolling. If you'd genuinely wanted help you'd have
been grateful for suggestions,

Enough trolling. If you'd genuinely wanted help you'd have
answered the question, instead of pushing a work-around - regardless of me
indicating that I already had one.

Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
and more forthcoming about your "program".

Why ? So that you could fix problems that do not exist and waste both our
time with that ?

Besides, I think I was quite clear in my explanation to why I didn't provide
(the name of) that program. That you are refusing to accept that isn't my
problem, is it ?

John, I mentioned having problems with people who ignore my stated question
and than replace it with whatever they conjure up what my /real/ problem
must be - even if they have zero underbuilding for it (aka: are on a fishing
expedition).

You seem to be one of those people. :-(

By the way: for my current situation the solution using taskkill just before
opening wordpad works nicely. I don't need to use a different editor, and I
don't need to do some kind of a cleanup of temporary files either.

Based of the taskkill method I wrote a small launcher thingamagochy* that I
could put in the registry. And with it I've solved my "generic problem".

* for which I had the choice to use batch, script or executable.

Not a solution I've seen anyone here even /hint/ at ... And definitily not
one for which knowledge of the source of the document was needed* (and I
regret having even mentioned it :-( )

* which, even though I mentioned two other possible sources, was still
demanded.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Newyana2

2024-04-05 10:52:58 UTC

"R.Wieser" <***@is.invalid> wrote

| > and more forthcoming about your "program".
|
| Why ? So that you could fix problems that do not exist and waste both
our
| time with that ?
|

It's OK, Rudy. Most of us understand that you're a mysterious Zen
master. And besides, this is a fun game, right? Let me try:

I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 10 that I intend to
write to memory. So why did my office light bulb go out? ...Last
one to guess is a rotten egg.

R.Wieser

2024-04-05 11:20:08 UTC

Newyana2,

Post by Newyana2
It's OK, Rudy. Most of us understand that you're a
mysterious Zen master.

With the question I asked ? I seem to be regarded as a noob, one who
doesn't even know what to ask.

Post by Newyana2
this is a fun game, right?

A game ? A *game* ?!

Trying to to make you guys understand that what I'm asking is what I need to
know - besides again-and-again mentioning that the I've already considered
work-arounds and made my choice in that regard but that I do not want to use
a work-around ?

To see all my attempts to do so being ignored ?

/That/ game ?

You *got* to be kidding. :-((

Post by Newyana2
I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 10 that I intend to
write to memory. So why did my office light bulb go out?

Thats an old riddle. The answer is : pure coincidence. :-)

Unless the "office light bulb" you're talking about is your own mind, you
ate to little this morning causing a glucose deficiency and, while trying to
think of a number, you zoned/passed out. :-p

... or should I have responded with "You say that, but what you /actually/
want to know is how much such a lightbulb costs". But for that I /ofcourse/
need to know who your power company is. <whistle>

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

R.Wieser

2024-03-30 08:42:39 UTC

Post by VanguardLH
No process can open a file to read or write without first creating
(open) a file handle (descriptor) on it.

True.
But what has that to do with what I said in the quote of mine just above
your response ?

Post by VanguardLH
"signals that the editor's content were change". That's the dirty bit,
change flag, or whatever term you want to use.

Ah yes, that was where you tried to conflate changes of the file and of
the contents of the editor.
Pray tell, *why* did you come up with the above ? Where did I mention
that was of any concern to me ? And yes, I expect you to quote it.

Post by VanguardLH
instead of the miraculous command-line arguments you WISH
Wordpad had?

Again, quote where I said that I /wished/, or as you try to make it sound
like /demanded/ they (multiple?) would be available. Why ?

Your claim of me "obsfucate again" made me wonder if you where not guilty of
that yourself - you're no stranger to hypocrisy - and made me remember that
I asked the above questions but have seen zero response to them.

I expect you explain yourself on the first and provide the quotes showing I
said what you claimed I did for the latter two.

If you again think you should ignore my ... lets call it "request" than I
think we both know what my conclusions will be ...

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

VanguardLH

2024-03-26 23:46:39 UTC

I don't think Wordpad will work how you want. When it opens a document,
it loads the doc into buffer. If the target doesn't change, it uses
what is in its buffer. You could change the file itself many times, but
Wordpad will still show you the contents of its buffer. You have to
flush the buffer by loading in a new doc even if it is the same file but
changed since lasted loaded. Wordpad's File -> Open menu is not an
option since you pick the same target, so it still shows you its current
buffer content. There is no Close in Wordpad to force creating a new
buffer, and selecting the same target has Wordpad "facilitate" reduction
of resource and enhanced load speed by showing you the buffer it already
has for that file.

As a test using Notepad, I opened it, entered "hello there", and saved
to test.txt. I left that Notepad instance open, so it will continue to
show the old contents still in its buffer. I edited test.txt using
Notepad++ (or anything but Notepad) to "out to lunch", and manually
saved the change (File -> Save), and exited Notepad++. I then
double-clicked the same test.txt file, and the Notepad instance that
opened loaded the current file into its own buffer, so I saw "out to
lunch" in the new instance of Notepad, and "hello there" in the older
instance of Notepad. With Notepad, a new instance would load the
changed file.

I did the same test using Wordpad. On an .rtf file containing "hello
there", I opened it in Wordpad. While the Wordpad window was left open
(so it continued to show the contents of its buffer), I edited test.rtf
using Notepad++ to change to "out to lunch", and saved manually (if I
just close Notepad++ there was no prompt to save changes). I then
opened the changed file in Wordpad. Nope, the 2nd instance of Wordpad
still showed "hello there" instead of "out to lunch". Almost as though
the 2nd instance of Wordpad were reusing the buffer from the 1st
instance of Wordpad.

Does your program have to output to an .rtf file? Maybe it could
generate a .txt file since Notepad will use a new buffer in a new
instance of it but Wordpad doesn't. Or you hit F2 in Explorer on the
file to rename from .rtf to .txt. You don't want to reassign .rtf
filetypes to a different editor since that would change the handler for
all .rtf files. Okay, so rename the file to .txt before double-clicking
on it. If you cannot change the program to output to a .txt file
instead of an .rtf file, you can force the change yourself by changing
the extension.

Is there really any formatting in the output file by the program that
would require RTF, or is it all just plain text?

John

2024-03-27 01:14:54 UTC

On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 18:46:39 -0500, VanguardLH <***@nguard.LH> wrote:

<<snipped some really good stuff>>

Post by VanguardLH
Does your program have to output to an .rtf file? Maybe it could
generate a .txt file since Notepad will use a new buffer in a new
instance of it but Wordpad doesn't. Or you hit F2 in Explorer on the
file to rename from .rtf to .txt. You don't want to reassign .rtf
filetypes to a different editor since that would change the handler for
all .rtf files. Okay, so rename the file to .txt before double-clicking
on it. If you cannot change the program to output to a .txt file
instead of an .rtf file, you can force the change yourself by changing
the extension.

Or he could save it as "Filename.zxz" and only assign "*.zxz" files
to Wordpad.

"*.txt" already has "properties" assigned to it by Windows, a
randomish extension probably won't and probably will inherit them from
the program saving to it.

Probably. Mostly. Maybe.

Post by VanguardLH
Is there really any formatting in the output file by the program that
would require RTF, or is it all just plain text?

"*.zxz" files could contain formatted text, too, if you saved to one
using Wordpad.

J.

J. P. Gilliver

2024-03-27 08:39:07 UTC

In message <***@4ax.com> at Wed, 27 Mar
2024 01:14:54, John <***@the.keyboard> writes
[]

Post by John
Or he could save it as "Filename.zxz" and only assign "*.zxz" files
to Wordpad.

[]
I thought of that too, but (a) that assumes that the creating prog. can
save with an arbitrary extension, (b) it wouldn't solve the problem
specific to WordPad that, if you double-click on a filename it already
has open, it doesn't re-open.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

If you're worried that your house is haunted by a ghost and might need
exorcising, there's an easy way of working out if it is or it isn't: it isn't.
- Victoria Coren Mitchell, quoted in RT 2017/10/7-13

R.Wieser

2024-03-27 11:47:41 UTC

Vanguard,

Post by VanguardLH
I don't think Wordpad will work how you want. When it opens a
document, it loads the doc into buffer. If the target doesn't
change, it uses what is in its buffer. You could change the file
itself many times, but Wordpad will still show you the contents
of its buffer.

Yes, I know. But I specifically mentioned double-clicking the document
file - which *does* cause the wordpad program, showing the old document, to
put itself ontop and focussed.

IOW, it gets a signal someone tried to open a document with the same name it
already has, but than blithely ignores al that information.

Post by VanguardLH
As a test using Notepad,

[snip]

Its not about /automatically/ updating the contents of wordpad when the file
changes, its about showing the contents of the file when the user
double-clicks it (a manual action).

Post by VanguardLH
Is there really any formatting in the output file by the program
that would require RTF, or is it all just plain text?

As so often, my question is not only aimed at my current situation, but also
at other, similar ones (trying to solve the problem at its root).

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

VanguardLH

2024-03-28 01:48:11 UTC

Post by R.Wieser
IOW, it gets a signal someone tried to open a document with the same
name it already has, but than blithely ignores al that information.

There is no "dirty bit" to identify a file has been changed after it has
been loaded in any process with a file handle on it. When inside an
editor when you make a change, yes, there is a dirty bit to let the
editor there was a change to prompt you on exit to save changes. That's
inside the editor, not back in the file system to notify every process
that has a file handle on the same file that there was a change.

An editor won't know if some other process has changed the file. There
is no interprocess communication between your program and Wordpad to let
Wordpad know your program changed the file. You want cooperating that
doesn't exist.

Wordpad has the ancient and nasty trait of reusing its buffer if the
filespec is the same as before. 28 years ago, Wordpad was not conceived
as an MDI (multiple document interface) editor. Since the target didn't
change, it shows you what it already loaded. Consider how long it would
take a new instance of Wordpad to load a changed file that was as large
as the maximum file size in NTFS. Unlike modern editors that load a
portion of a huge file into a buffer, let's you view and edit that, and
then has to load more of the file into the buffer, Wordpad loads all of
the doc into a buffer. Just because "Word" is in the "Wordpad" product
name does not mean Wordpad is as robust as MS Word. Microsoft has been
conflating product titles for a very long time. At around 16 MB,
Wordpad will get very slow to load a file that size. Even MS Word 2010
had an upper limit of 512 MB on RTF files. Wordpad doesn't have robust
error correction: when you open a huge file, corruption or tail-end
truncation may happen. Just because Wordpad eventually gets around to
loading a huge document doesn't mean it should. You can do a lot of
work in Wordpad, and lose a lot on a save/exit. It's a crappy RTF
editor.

If you don't want something huge like MS Word to edit RTF files, and
since Wordpad is disappointing, look to something better to handle RTF
files. I use MS Word, have used LibreOffice (LO), but back to MS Word
(too many functions missing or workaround in LO). LO is free. Some
folks like FreeOffice (Softmaker the parent) or WPS Office (the latter
had a reputation problem in the past for spying, but they changed).
AbiWord, TextMaker, and lots of other free choices.

You want to do more than Wordpad can do. That means using something
other than Wordpad, or use workarounds. Several have been mentioned,
but you mentioned taskkill at the start, and decided to stick with that.

Post by R.Wieser
Its not about /automatically/ updating the contents of wordpad when the file
changes, its about showing the contents of the file when the user
double-clicks it (a manual action).

And that's what I did with Notepad. I didn't say I saw the current
instance of Notepad showing changes in the file. I said opening a new
instance of Notepad after changes were made to the file.

Post by R.Wieser
As so often, my question is not only aimed at my current situation,
but also at other, similar ones (trying to solve the problem at its
root).

The root of the problem is Wordpad is 28 years old introduced back in
Windows 9x, has no command-line args (other than filespec and /p), and
won't do what you want. Getting it to do what you want requires some
wrangling outside of Wordpad.

R.Wieser

2024-03-28 10:14:13 UTC

Vanguard,

Post by R.Wieser
IOW, it gets a signal someone tried to open a document with the same
name it already has, but than blithely ignores al that information.

There is no "dirty bit" to identify a file has been changed after it has
been loaded

Why should a "dirty bit" be involved ? Just throw whatever is in there out
and reload the provided file. Not really rocket science.

Post by VanguardLH
in any process with a file handle on it.

Mistake. As reading this thread about how wordpad (doesn't) deals with its
underlying document should have shown you (there is no "handle" it keeps).

Post by VanguardLH
yes, there is a dirty bit to let the editor there was a change to
prompt you on exit to save changes.

Second mistake : trying to conflate the files "dirty" bit with the one which
signals that the editors contents where changed. Nasty move.

Post by VanguardLH
An editor won't know if some other process has changed the file.

Third mistake.

That has been brought up multiple times by others and answered. As I've
also told them, thats not what I posted I wanted to see happen.

And by the away, yes, its very possible for a program to track if a file
gets changed. Some editors use it and will offer the user the option to
(re)load the changed file - something that I think has also been mentioned
in this thread ...

Post by VanguardLH
You want cooperating that doesn't exist.

Fourth mistake.

And that was told to me (by you or anyone else) ... where ?

IOW, you *only now* claim it doesn't exist, packed in an accusation for me
not knowing it. Quite a dick move.

Post by VanguardLH
Wordpad has the ancient and nasty trait of reusing its buffer
if the filespec is the same as before.

Thanks captain obvious. Thats what my whole question was/is about.

Post by VanguardLH
Since the target didn't change, it shows you what it already loaded.

"Since the targets *NAME* didn't change,"

There, fixed that for you.

Don't you think its funnily stupid to see that wordpad remembers the
filename, but "forgets" something easy-and-short-to-remember like the files
last-modified date/time ?

Post by VanguardLH
The root of the problem is Wordpad is

(that it)

Post by VanguardLH
has no command-line args (other than filespec and /p),

Nice to see you contradict yourself in a single line. :-)

Post by VanguardLH
and won't do what you want.

And thats the only thing I wanted to have input on.

At times you respond as if you have a head on your shoulders, and at other
times ... meh.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

J. P. Gilliver

2024-03-28 12:28:05 UTC

Post by R.Wieser
Vanguard,

[]

Post by R.Wieser
At times you respond as if you have a head on your shoulders, and at other
times ... meh.

[]
We're all guilty of that - including you, as well as me and Vanguard.
The only (regular) one who mostly doesn't is patient Paul.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Does Barbie come with Ken?"
"Barbie comes with G.I. Joe. She fakes it with Ken." - anonymous

R.Wieser

2024-03-28 13:25:50 UTC

J. P. ,

Post by J. P. Gilliver
We're all guilty of that - including you, as well as me and Vanguard.

Yep, it happens to the best of us. And than I hope I get called out for it
too, as its not my intention.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

VanguardLH

2024-03-28 20:47:52 UTC

Post by R.Wieser
Vanguard,

Post by R.Wieser
IOW, it gets a signal someone tried to open a document with the same
name it already has, but than blithely ignores al that information.

There is no "dirty bit" to identify a file has been changed after it
has been loaded

Why should a "dirty bit" be involved ? Just throw whatever is in there out
and reload the provided file. Not really rocket science.

Post by VanguardLH
in any process with a file handle on it.

Mistake. As reading this thread about how wordpad (doesn't) deals with its
underlying document should have shown you (there is no "handle" it keeps).

No process can open a file to read or write without first creating
(open) a file handle (descriptor) on it. That's how file I/O works.
Once the file has been buffered, the file handle may no longer needed
(closed). You'd think an editor would leave open the file handle to
accomodate writes, but it could also close the handle, let you make
edits to its buffer, and then save the changes later (open the file,
write, close the file).

Post by VanguardLH
yes, there is a dirty bit to let the editor there was a change to
prompt you on exit to save changes.

Second mistake : trying to conflate the files "dirty" bit with the one
which signals that the editors contents where changed. Nasty move.

"signals that the editor's content were change". That's the dirty bit,
change flag, or whatever term you want to use. When you change anything
in the editor, it tracks there was a change. Even if you delete a space
and re-add it, the dirty bit aka change flag aka pick-your-term tracks
there was a change.

Post by VanguardLH
You want cooperating that doesn't exist.

Fourth mistake.
And that was told to me (by you or anyone else) ... where ?

How about EVERYTHING that has participated here telling you about
workarounds instead of the miraculous command-line arguments you WISH
Wordpad had?

Post by VanguardLH
The root of the problem is Wordpad is

(that it)

Post by VanguardLH
has no command-line args (other than filespec and /p),

Nice to see you contradict yourself in a single line. :-)

You're not only uber pendantic, but want to omit that exclusions can be
specified in a rule. Okay, let's see if you can manage to cogitate
using your two brain cells to figure out the following. Syntax is:

wordpad.exe [/p] <filespec>

That's it. That's all you get. Nothing more. No other command-line
arguments available regardless of what you wish for. You act like a
child that thinks everything must be your way. Now go searching for
yourself to find someone citing more command-line arguments for Wordpad.
Enjoy wasting your time.

R.Wieser

2024-03-29 11:32:31 UTC

Vanguard,

Post by R.Wieser
Mistake. As reading this thread about how wordpad (doesn't) deals
with its underlying document should have shown you (there is no
"handle" it keeps).

No process can open a file to read or write without first creating
(open) a file handle (descriptor) on it.

True.

But what has that to do with what I said in the quote of mine just above
your response ?

Or do you want me to post some very factual information to how plants grow
and demand that you accept it as proof that what you said is wrong ? And
yes, what you did there is as silly.

Post by VanguardLH
"signals that the editor's content were change". That's the dirty bit,
change flag, or whatever term you want to use.

Ah yes, that was where you tried to conflate changes of the file and of the
contents of the editor.

Pray tell, *why* did you come up with the above ? Where did I mention that
was of any concern to me ? And yes, I expect you to quote it.

Post by R.Wieser
And that was told to me (by you or anyone else) ... where ?

How about EVERYTHING that has participated here telling you
about workarounds

It could have multiple reasons, with one of them none of the posters*
knowing nothing about the commandline arguments of wordpad.

* excluding J. P. and possibly Paul ofcourse. :-)

Post by VanguardLH
instead of the miraculous command-line arguments you WISH
Wordpad had?

Again, quote where I said that I /wished/, or as you try to make it sound
like /demanded/ they (multiple?) would be available. Why ?

You see, as far as I can tell I asked "Is there a way to override this
behaviour using a command-line argument ?". Yes, a simple 'does it exist?'
question.

No, you /again/ tried to wrangle something simple I said in something it has
never been. And that reflects poorly on you.

Post by VanguardLH
The root of the problem is Wordpad is

(that it)

Post by VanguardLH
has no command-line args (other than filespec and /p),

Nice to see you contradict yourself in a single line. :-)

You're not only uber pendantic,

Maybe you should not have tried to claim I said stuff I never have, cause
that triggers my 'read extra carefully' mode, which also captures stuff like
the above.

IOW: you don't like it ? You know how to fix it.

Post by VanguardLH
but want to omit that exclusions
can be specified in a rule.

The thing is that I didn't ask for exclusions. I asked for an existence.
Which /should/ have been simple to answer. But obviously not for you...

Post by VanguardLH
wordpad.exe [/p] <filespec>
That's it. That's all you get. Nothing more.

Yeah, you also said that in another post.

The problem with that is that I both have different information, as well as
knowing that some commands/programs have "hidden" arguments.

And yes, I was hoping that perhaps wordpad would have such a hidden
argument. Perhaps a far-fetched hope, but as they say, "if you don't shoot
you will never hit the target". Why do you think my question was so concise
?

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

VanguardLH

2024-03-29 17:11:52 UTC

I asked for an existence. Which /should/ have been simple to answer.
But obviously not for you...

3 days ago in my first response I said filespec and /p were it for args.

Paul

2024-03-26 21:22:03 UTC

Perhaps you can launch Wordpad.exe from inside your program,
treating Wordpad as a viewer and not as an editor.

https://www.codeproject.com/Messages/146718/The-full-path-of-WordPad-exe

CreateProcess( "C:\\Program Files\\Accessories\\WordPad.exe", "D:\\myDoc.rtf",
NULL, NULL,FALSE, 0, NULL, NULL, &StartupInfo, &ProcessInfo ))

CreateProcess( "C:\\Program Files\\Windows NT\\Accessories\\WordPad.exe", "D:\\myDoc.rtf",
NULL, NULL,FALSE, 0, NULL, NULL, &StartupInfo, &ProcessInfo ))

That sort of thing. Then, when the conversion program has a new version to test,
it uses the %ProcessInfo to kill the old one.

Paul

R.Wieser

2024-03-27 09:02:53 UTC

Paul,

Post by Paul
Perhaps you can launch Wordpad.exe from inside your program,
treating Wordpad as a viewer and not as an editor.

Thats assuming I can rewrite "the program" ...

Post by Paul
That sort of thing. Then, when the conversion program has a new version to
test, it uses the %ProcessInfo to kill the old one.

Yes, thats possible (I mentioned taskkill in my initial post).

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Paul

2024-03-27 14:39:53 UTC

Post by R.Wieser
Paul,

Post by Paul
Perhaps you can launch Wordpad.exe from inside your program,
treating Wordpad as a viewer and not as an editor.

Thats assuming I can rewrite "the program" ...

Post by Paul
That sort of thing. Then, when the conversion program has a new version to
test, it uses the %ProcessInfo to kill the old one.

Yes, thats possible (I mentioned taskkill in my initial post).
Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Write a script to automate the looping behavior you desire.
Then it no longer matters, as you are saved the effort.

Paul

R.Wieser

2024-03-27 20:17:39 UTC

Paul,

Post by Paul
Write a script to automate the looping behavior you desire.

There is no looping behaviour to be automated.

I'm the one who runs the ... something which creates the new document, and
again I who double-clicks the document afterwards. Its all manual labour.
And hard work :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

R.Wieser

2024-03-28 10:40:51 UTC

Although the responses to my actual question are minimal, they seem to
indicate that no such override is available.

Alas.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Frank Slootweg

2024-03-29 18:57:09 UTC

[Judging from the responses: Probably not!]

Post by R.Wieser
remark: I prefer /not/ to use taskkill.

[As you're looking for undocumented behaviour:]

Long shot: Have you tried to see if there is any difference in WordPad
behaviour between doing a 'taskkill /f ...' and doing a taskkill
without /f?

'taskkill /?' says

/F Specifies to forcefully terminate the process(es).

but doesn't say how that differs from a non-/f taskkill.

$WISHFUL THINKING MODE ON

Perhaps without /f, WordPad will do the desired thing and re-read the
file. I.e. similar to what unix programs can do when getting signals
like HUP, INT, USR1, USR2, etc., i.e. do something special, but do not
terminate.

$WISHFUL THINKING MODE OFF

R.Wieser

2024-03-29 20:49:33 UTC

Frank,

Post by Frank Slootweg
Long shot: Have you tried to see if there is any difference in
WordPad behaviour between doing a 'taskkill /f ...' and doing a
taskkill without /f?

As a matter of fact, I did. It didn't make a difference - likely because
taskkill first tries to ask nicely, and only if that doesn't work applies
force.

And as wordpad most likely responds to being asked nicely the "force" method
is never used.

Post by Frank Slootweg
$WISHFUL THINKING MODE ON
Perhaps without /f, WordPad will do the desired thing and re-read
the file.

Whooo! Yes, thats quite the long shot. :-)

But alas, when I tried that I didn't see that happen.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Frank Slootweg

2024-03-30 09:52:15 UTC

Post by R.Wieser
Frank,

Post by Frank Slootweg
Long shot: Have you tried to see if there is any difference in
WordPad behaviour between doing a 'taskkill /f ...' and doing a
taskkill without /f?

As a matter of fact, I did. It didn't make a difference - likely because
taskkill first tries to ask nicely, and only if that doesn't work applies
force.

It would be nice to know what taskkill actually does, instead of us
having to guess.

Post by R.Wieser
And as wordpad most likely responds to being asked nicely the "force" method
is never used.

Yep.

Post by Frank Slootweg
$WISHFUL THINKING MODE ON
Perhaps without /f, WordPad will do the desired thing and re-read
the file.

Whooo! Yes, thats quite the long shot. :-)

Well, it's not such a long shot, for the reasons I gave (and you
snipped). If other operating systems can do it, there's no reason
Windows can't do it. But it's all moot/theoretical.

Post by R.Wieser
But alas, when I tried that I didn't see that happen.

To be expected, but worth the try (you already did).

R.Wieser

2024-03-30 10:43:00 UTC

Frank,

Post by Frank Slootweg
It would be nice to know what taskkill actually does, instead of
us having to guess.

Indeed. I have a situation where it interferes with the shutting down of a
program, and as I do not know where the wm_close is sent I had to guess.
In the end I wrote a small program which just sends that wm_close to the
programs dialog window.

Post by Frank Slootweg
Perhaps without /f, WordPad will do the desired thing and
re-read the file.

Whooo! Yes, thats quite the long shot. :-)

Well, it's not such a long shot, for the reasons I gave (and
you snipped).

Does Windows support any of those, as I think I recognise, Linux signals ?

Post by Frank Slootweg
If other operating systems can do it, there's
no reason Windows can't do it.

True.

But as I read taskkills help and saw nothing indicating it would support
such signals to be send, the reloading effect of whats /supposed/ to be a
"close yourself please" request would be a rather wierd side-effect on
wordpads behalf. Hence my "Whooo!" response.

But in that case, how would you tell taskkill to send a non-forced "close
yourself please" to wordpad ? If available it would than be different than
whats used for every other program, and that makes little logical sense ...

Post by R.Wieser
But alas, when I tried that I didn't see that happen.

To be expected, but worth the try (you already did).

Trying stuff out, even just to see what happens (and learn from it!) is
never a bad idea - as long as its not on an important
'puter/program/database/etc. ofcourse. :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Frank Slootweg

2024-03-30 13:30:19 UTC

R.Wieser <***@is.invalid> wrote:
[...]

Post by Frank Slootweg
Perhaps without /f, WordPad will do the desired thing and
re-read the file.

Whooo! Yes, thats quite the long shot. :-)

Well, it's not such a long shot, for the reasons I gave (and
you snipped).

Does Windows support any of those, as I think I recognise, Linux signals ?

I don't know. I don't do any Windows programming (only programmed on
UNIX, a little MS-DOS and before that on proprietary HP systems) and
haven't looked into what kind of 'signals' Windows has.

Newer Windows system can have WSL (Windows Subsystem for Linux), but I
don't know if that offers any IPC (Inter Program Communication) between
the Windows and Linux environments.

I have Cygwin - a Linux-like environment - on my Windows system, but
that only knows about other Cygwin processes, not about Windows ones.

Post by Frank Slootweg
If other operating systems can do it, there's
no reason Windows can't do it.

True.
But as I read taskkills help and saw nothing indicating it would support
such signals to be send, the reloading effect of whats /supposed/ to be a
"close yourself please" request would be a rather wierd side-effect on
wordpads behalf. Hence my "Whooo!" response.
But in that case, how would you tell taskkill to send a non-forced "close
yourself please" to wordpad ? If available it would than be different than
whats used for every other program, and that makes little logical sense ...

Yes, taskkill would need to have more than two 'signals', but from
'taskkill /?' it looks it has only these two, not the granularity which
unix/Linux offer.

Post by R.Wieser
But alas, when I tried that I didn't see that happen.

To be expected, but worth the try (you already did).

Trying stuff out, even just to see what happens (and learn from it!) is
never a bad idea - as long as its not on an important
'puter/program/database/etc. ofcourse. :-)

R.Wieser

2024-03-31 06:54:55 UTC

Frank,